seruniversefandomcom-20200215-history
Feedback
Here you can write feedback on our game to allow us to optimize and redesign the game to be as good as possible. The groups who are scheduled to test our game have designated areas where they can write all the feedback they want. For anyone else who might have feedback for our game, feel free to use the Additional Feedback area. Test Week 1 Group 10 Your game was very fun and simple since the core system is the cards themselves. It was competitive in that manner you wanted to destroy for the other players whenever you were able to and that you wanted to win the “round” and gain the prize, the current card which is being competed for. The fun in the game was the planning to do strategic moves with the cards on your hand (playing zone). However the cards that were supposed to destroy for the other players felt kind of a loss to play out since when you play one of these instead of an attribute card, you have minimized your chances to win. Also the sabotage it was supposed to do for the other players were insufficient. We discussed that it would be preferably if it affected all of the opponents once being played since the cards are so few and costs one attribute card’s place in play turn. We really liked the part where you choose one of your cards during the end of each round and were able to make this card’s effect permanent. It really added more tension to the game as the game felt more intense for each “battle”. /Group 10 ---- Group 11 The good stuff: This feels like a clever combat system that, with some tweaking, could be implemented in many types of games that requires players to battle each other, the rules however needs a lot of work so that the system is fully understandable. It would probably help a lot with graphics to show the playing area and different zones. We like how the system where you turn up two combat cards allows the players to plan ahead for next round. The system seems well thought through. The card that allowed players to remove a card from opponent’s preparation area was a nice feature that helps preventing negative loops where the player(s) that won first and second round got too much advantage over the others. Improvements to consider: The card that allowed players to remove opponents card could be extracted from this system and instead be a secondary system itself. Because with one system you sacrifice half your actions in order to have one player “suffer”. Rules are very confusing and hard to understand. End phase is unclear in the rules; do you discard the playing zone or the entire hand? It states nowhere how and when to use the sabotage cards. If players draw cards to solve even score, the rule doesn’t state what happens if one of the players draw a negative card, does he lose because it awards no pints or can he instantly use it to make the opponent lose? It was unclear that we should only use 5 competition round cards, we played it keeping to turn up more from the pile, if the rules had stated that the game is played in 5 rounds this would have been clearer. It could be an idea to find a way with less mental arithmetic to calculating the scores. Especially if it’s to be implemented into another game, giving even more things to keep track of. Conclusion We feel it’s a smart system that can be usable in many games and we think you should spend some time on rewriting the rules for clarity. Test Week 2 Group 5 ---- Group 8 Additional Feedback